Intel Core i9-12900K 36% Faster Than Stock in Maximum Turbo Power Mode

[Nanochip]

In the same power envelope as Rocket lake (or even slightly less), alder lake is delivering big performance increases? That’s good. Power usage can be further optimized by tuning the voltage.

Yeah Alder Lake might consume more power than Ryzen (when under turbo and sustained load) but it will still put pressure on AMD to react. If the 12600k beats the 5800x and the 12700k beats the 5900x (or at least gets close or trades blows) for less money, that will put pressure on amd. Also, Z690 is a big platform upgrade over z590 and also x570/b550. Some Z690 boards come with thunderbolt, aquantia 10gbps lan, 4 pcie4.0 m.2 slots, and so on. Some asus boards even come with a pcie5.0 m.2 slot. X570 is good, but Z690 is very competitive vs x570, something that could sway some prospective buyers to purchase an Alder Lake system over zen.

 

[docnorth]

Probably because any higher is not a good idea given the IHS solution they implement. Its thin. Also, there is the problem of heat concentration, even with the thinner IHS/paste/solder solution.

If they can't dissipate fast enough, you can run more power through the chip, but it'll just not work within safe parameters even in the typical 24/7 Intel test bed of water chiller plus nuclear plant.

Aaand... boy what a surprise, Intel chips still get hot on the fabled 10nm that is ALSO clocked way out of its comfort zone like 14nm was. You don't say.

This makes sense. Also performance gains might shrink further beyond this limit.

 

[Pumper]

the price says everything intel thinks about the 12900k. A bit faster than the 5900X and not as close to the 5950X.
36%+performance for 100%+ power? Sure no.
If the little cores were as good as they say, they would do a 4P + 24E design with the same area.

How is that any different from AMD? A 5950X with all core overclock needs +160W at full load (over the stock ~140W) and only gains +20% performance https://www.kitguru.net/components/cpu/luke-hill/amd-ryzen-9-5950x-zen-3-cpu-review/17/

 

[persondb]

Reminder to all, this isn't stock behavior but basically when power limits are raised to maximum. This is very similar to what AMD does with PBO(precision boost overdrive) which raises the limit of PPT/TDC/EDC to whatever you want(within motherboard set limit).

As someone who much prefers traditional CPU coolers over AIO's, you have to ask if there is any current tower cooler out there that can cope with a 12900K at full power..The (supposedly) best of the best, the Noctua DH15 has a TDP limit of 250w, so at 241w, its going to be right on the edge of thermal throttling territory, in 100% CPU load productivity work like rendering and encoding, at least Gaming will be no problem, I suppose, as that never pushes any CPU to all core 100% load for anything other than brief periods for stuff like shader compilation.

This is basically an overclocked 12900K though. Not really overclocked since it's still in specs, but the default behavior is PL1 = 125W and PL2 = 241W.
Which means that the 12900K will turbo for a couple of seconds and then go back to the sustained power draw(PL1). You shouldn't worry about that unless you plan to set PL1 to 241W.
You can see the behavior in this picture.

 

[Zubasa]

Reminder to all, this isn't stock behavior but basically when power limits are raised to maximum. This is very similar to what AMD does with PBO(precision boost overdrive) which raises the limit of PPT/TDC/EDC to whatever you want(within motherboard set limit).



This is basically an overclocked 12900K though. Not really overclocked since it's still in specs, but the default behavior is PL1 = 125W and PL2 = 241W.
Which means that the 12900K will turbo for a couple of seconds and then go back to the sustained power draw(PL1). You shouldn't worry about that unless you plan to set PL1 to 241W.
You can see the behavior in this picture.

View attachment 223221

Actually the stock behavior for the 12-gen K-SKUs is PL2 with no time limit. That is what the yellow text implies.
What you say should be true for the 12900 non-K though.
Motherboard makers actually have the option to go even further than 241W for the K-SKUs.

 

[persondb]

Actually the stock behavior for the 12-gen K-SKUs is PL2 with no time limit. That is what the yellow text implies.
What you say should be true for the 12900 non-K though.
Motherboard makers actually have the option to go even further than 241W for the K-SKUs.
View attachment 223222

Then my bad, I misinterpreted it but that's kind of odd in my view as it seemed to imply that PL1 wasn't equal to PL2 unless the user specifically set it for that.

 

[AusWolf]

Yeah, as expected they have power and heat issues like recent intel generations. Damn.

Power issues: yes, heat issues: not necessarily. Actually, Ryzen 3000 and 5000 CPUs run much hotter when configured with power limits to match Rocket Lake. Power doesn't equal heat, despite common misbelief.

 

[Zubasa]

Then my bad, I misinterpreted it but that's kind of odd in my view as it seemed to imply that PL1 wasn't equal to PL2 unless the user specifically set it for that.

IMO Intel being more transparent is a good thing. They are finally acknowledging how their CPUs will be run IRL.

Power issues: yes, heat issues: not necessarily. Actually, Ryzen 3000 and 5000 CPUs run much hotter when configured with similar power limits to match Rocket Lake.

A lot of it has to do with the higher density of TSMC N7 vs Intel 14nm, resulting in smaller surface area for heat transfer.
Intel 7 / 10nm ESF is theoretically even denser than TSMC N7, so it remains to be seen.
There are reasons why Intel explicitly states that an effort has been made to aid heat transfer. They wouldn't do all this extra work if it is not necessary.

 

[wolf]

Well I don't much sit around gunning for cinebench scores these days, I want to see gaming performance.

 

[The Quim Reaper]

You shouldn't worry about that unless you plan to set PL1 to 241W.

Which is exactly what I would do!

My 9900k is overclocked to 5GHz all the time the PC is on. with power saving C-states disabled.

 

[Vayra86]

Then my bad, I misinterpreted it but that's kind of odd in my view as it seemed to imply that PL1 wasn't equal to PL2 unless the user specifically set it for that.

Hey you don't win benches playing fair now, you need to get the masses into 'euh wut? Don't get it, but I'm sure its better' territory.
Social media will do the rest for you, with a slew of under 100 IQ-Youtubers alongside them.

 

[Turmania]

Funnily just couple years ago I was pointing finger at AMD for not having efficient cpu and gpu regards to power usage. Now tables have turned.

 

[Guwapo77]

Probably because any higher is not a good idea given the IHS solution they implement. Its thin. Also, there is the problem of heat concentration, even with the thinner IHS/paste/solder solution.

If they can't dissipate fast enough, you can run more power through the chip, but it'll just not work within safe parameters even in the typical 24/7 Intel test bed of water chiller plus nuclear plant.

Aaand... boy what a surprise, Intel chips still get hot on the fabled 10nm that is ALSO clocked way out of its comfort zone like 14nm was. You don't say.

What's 9 watts in the grand scheme of things? It will probably slap 250w anyways. It almost reminds me of silly American prices, a donut costs $1.99 vs saying it costs $2.00. You know, the 250W might be reserved for a future Black model. You know, the model that is guaranteed to best AMD's V-Cache processors.

 

[Dristun]

Which is exactly what I would do!

My 9900k is overclocked to 5GHz all the time the PC is on. with power saving C-states disabled.

Hopefully nobody from UN Environment Assembly is reading this forum or TPU might be in trouble

 

[The Quim Reaper]

Hopefully nobody from UN Environment Assembly is reading this forum or TPU might be in trouble

Not really, It maybe clocked to the max, but its still just mostly idling, barely using any power (30w-40w) when doing the normal day-day stuff.

 

[AusWolf]

Not really, It maybe clocked to the max, but its still just mostly idling, barely using any power (30w-40w) when doing the normal day-day stuff.

30-40 W at idle is a lot, imo. You could get it down to the lower teens by enabling C-states. What's the benefit of disabling C-states anyway?

 

[Marshal_90]

Holy Moly 241 W for 11000 score? Is this just for the CPU or the whole system?

R9 5950x's whole system under load consumes less power than only 12900K CPU!

I thought this was supposed to be a Ryzen moment!

 

[Richards]

Electricity is cheap... intel wants the performance crown

 

[The Quim Reaper]

30-40 W at idle is a lot, imo. You could get it down to the lower teens by enabling C-states. What's the benefit of disabling C-states anyway?

That 30-40w was for the entire PC.

CPU is less than 20w

 

[AusWolf]

Electricity is cheap... intel wants the performance crown

Energy price cap: Millions of households face higher gas and electricity bills

Standard energy bills rise by £139 a year and prepayment meter bills see sharper rise under new price cap.

www.bbc.co.uk

That 30-40w was for the entire PC.

CPU is less than 20w

Ah! That's different. My mistake.

 

[ViperXTR]

Any leaked reviews yet?
Wanna see that 12600K go

 

[Lord_Soth]

I think that the title is misleading, the correct title is:

"Intel Core i9-12900K 36% Slower at Stock without Maximum Turbo Power Mode"

since all benchmark until now are with maximum turbo power ON at 241w, to nearly match 5950X stock 105w TDP.

 

[Cobain]

Here we go again... 241 watts at what? Prime95? 3d Mark? Cinebench?

Do you even play games?

Boring

 

[skaldic]

241Ws ? more like 241KWs

 

[Crackong]

Power doesn't equal heat, despite common misbelief.

You mean temperature right ?

Since there is no physical work done within a CPU, all energy input is converting to heat.
So power = heat inside a CPU.